Are AR-15's really necessary?

[jrdolall]

As soon as you get into a discussion about banning guns the word "need" will come out. If you allow that word to be the focal part of the discussion then you lose.

I own guns. I own a lot of guns. I own many different "assault style" weapons. I own many different pistols in many different calibers. I own many different shotguns in different configurations. I own 11 scoped "deer hunting" rifles. I own 24 different .22 firearms.

Why do I "need" all of this? The answer, quite simply, is "I don't". I don't really "need" more than maybe two of them. A pistol for SD and a shotgun for HD or maybe just the pistol. I hunt a lot and kill deer for food but I could easily just not eat deer meat. I don't need to eat wild duck and dove when store bought chicken is available. I certainly don't "need" all those different guns that are solely for pleasure and target shooting.

Why do I have three dogs? Other than occasionally warning me of a visitor they are pretty useless so I don't "need" them. I don't "need" my extra truck since I only ues it on very rare occasions when a primary vehicle is down.

I think it is fortunate for the gun owning public that so many women are beginning to get involved in gun ownership. Their involvement and education means that there are less "antis" out there than before.

 

[brnmuenchow]

For me it's not about if it's necessary, I have every right to own one... I also would not use it in any self defense use, I have pistols for that. There is nothing evil about the gun itself just the men or man that uses it for evil and that goes for AK rifles also.

 

[Gtimothy]

Whether I need one or want one is irrelevant. I am a responsible American who has served my country, retired from said service HONORABLY and do not have to explain my wants and desires to a bunch of limp wristed namby pambys who think "Guns are EVIL!"

The 2A guarantees my right to keep and bear arms PERIOD! It doesn't say "Except for assault weapons with large capacity magazines". AR-15s are no more dangerous than a car sitting in a driveway. It isn't until a crazy person gets behind the wheel that the trouble begins. I have yet to hear for the ban on cars because of DUI drivers! Yet more people die on our roads than from guns.

Off my soap box!

 

[awgrizzly]

I join others in proclaiming in the strongest terms that it is not for us to show why something is necessary, whether it's guns or kumquats. Something so very few keep forgetting, what we do and why we do it is none of the government's business, and if they intend to do something to restrict us in any way it is they who have to prove the necessity... and perceived ugliness is not a valid justification. Anything less is tyranny, which we are empowered to ignore. We should 'just say no'.

 

[awgrizzly]

It's against the law to shoot 72 people in a movie theater. If that isn't enough law, counting the bullets in a magazine won't do squat. Laws don't prevent crime, they define crime... if the @#$%^s in Washington are allowed to keep doing this stuff, soon we will be committing a crime if we sneeze.

 

[1911 guy]

A twenty year old Yugo would get me back and forth to work just fine. Maybe I should be having a crisis over whether or not I need a new Chevrolet.

Need has very little to do with ninety percent of what every American owns, guns or not. You don't NEED nice clothes. You don't NEED gourmet food. You don't NEED a riding lawn mower. You don't NEED more than a three room house. We have wants and conveniences and are lucky enough to live in a country that allows us the standard of living and freedom to pursue those wants and conveniences.

Not directed directly at the OP but to all who are having a similar internal debate:

Stop trying to give it all away to feed some guilt trip a talking head says you should have. Guilt is reserved for those who have actually done something wrong and for those who are weak enough to let other impose their ineptitude and ignorance on them.

 

[Certaindeaf]

.whether it's guns or kumquats..

Last month, California banned foi gras.. that's goose/duck liver and in my opinion one of the most sublime of foods. anyway, they just keep pecking away on about everything related to personal freedom/choice/responsibility.

 

[k9ridge09]

Is a Big Gulp necessary? Salt on your food? Having the right to make choices about your own health and children's education? How about your right to work and enjoy the fruits of your labor without having it confiscated and distributed to the interests of a few elected officials? Is your right to defend yourself and your family important?
I don't see how something being a necessity has anything to do with this debate. There are hundreds of things I have that you may not consider a necessity. This does not give you or anyone else the right to take them. Nor do I have a right to take anything from you.
What all are you willing to give up?

 

[olafhardtB]

I despise AR.'S, 1911's, humpback Brownings , Sharps rifles and o/u 12 gauges. I love levers, break open single shots and da wheel guns. When SD runs your life the thugs have won, when you worry about whether or not you need a gun the antis have won, when you got a gun cause that's what you want, you have won.

 

[Cosmoline]

Is a Big Gulp necessary? Salt on your food? Having the right to make choices about your own health and children's education?

These aren't slippery slope arguments, either. As it turns out the same Mayor who wants to ban AR-15's ALSO wants to ban big gulps and tightly regulate the food his subjects are permitted to purchase. If it wasn't actually true I wouldn't believe it myself. And it does tend to reenforce the mantra that gun control is about controlling people, not firearms.

 

[22-rimfire]

The discussion about AR's (as a collective term for military style semi-auto rifles) and mental health issue are coming up again. The press likes to mention that the rifle used by the Aurora shooter was illegal under the so called assault weapons ban like that would have actually made a difference. I don't know if it is or isn't illegal. Obama has stated his opinion again recently that goes beyond working within present laws which was his initial stance following the shooting.

Beware!

The police TV shows usually mention firearm traces and whether the gun was legal. The fact is they can't do a trace like is shown on TV. But this is conditioning for people to begin to accept this as commonplace and acceptable. Most people assume that law enforcement can do this quite easily.

 

[holdencm9]

I love levers, break open single shots and da wheel guns. When SD runs your life the thugs have won, when you worry about whether or not you need a gun the antis have won, when you got a gun cause that's what you want, you have won.

Even if I had a crystal ball and knew 100% without a doubt I would never NEED it, I would still want my AR. Reminds me of good times. Fun to take apart.

 

[bluethunder1962]

I think of guns two ways protection and sport. Protection they would not be your first choice but most people buy them because they are so fun to shoot.

 

[Espada]

"I guess what I am saying is that I am preparing to have to concede something to new gun legislation and I would rather it be my AR's than my handguns. "

Nobody has asked you to concede anything... and you're all ready to do it anyway ?

"If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
- Samuel Adams

 

[Kingofthehill]

I love how you think a .223 will over-penetrate MORE than a pistol caliber round. A .223 will go through less walls than a .45 and thats a fact.

Do some research before you spread misinformation.

is it "needed"? Yes IMO. Look at the 1994 Riots in Los Angeles. Those business owners were on their rooftops using "Assault Rifles" to protect themselves and their livelihood after the police pulled out and left everyone to fend for themselves.

I was a victim of Home Invasion. Those 3 guys were knocking my front door down and when it hinged, they saw me with my AR-15 at the furthest distance ready to fill them with as much lead as i could sling their way. Maybe a handgun would of scared them just as much but im going to pull that trigger as many times as it takes to stop the threat and I was more comfortable grabbing my AR-15 than my Glock 19.

Yes there is a reason, if one doesn't feel there isn't... well that's their opinion and they don't have to buy one.

 

[bluethunder1962]

Where do you think these people get these ideas? From watching movies and video games. Are they talking about doing away with them? NO. Why is it always the guns fault. After what happened during the atlanta olympics did everybody start calling for a ban on steel pipes and nails? Would all the gun haters be happy if he tossed about 5 pipe bombs in there?

 

[MedWheeler]

I'm sure it's been said in many of 165 preceding posts, but I don't think banning something just because it's "not necessary" makes much sense in a free society. I don't "need" a car capable of exceeding 70 MPH because there are no roads anywhere I drive with higher limits. But, I'd never suggest banning them. In fact, my primary vehicle is capable of seating more persons than I have in my household, but that doesn't mean I should not have it.

 

[jon_in_wv]

Necessity is irrelevant. Is it "necessary" to sell cars that have 300+ HP, or trucks that get 18 MPG, or liquor in magnum bottles, or beer in 16 gal kegs, 700 calorie Whoppers, etc..........You don't ban something because it isn't "necessary".

 

[Kingofthehill]

The fact is that we as gun owners are constantly under attack. WE need to stick together and just because a certain type of firearm doesn't match what you would use doesn't mean other people don't have a need or simply a want for one.

Obama came on TV last night about banning Ak-47's and you can be sure the AR is going to be included along with multiple others.

Please don't fall into the thinking "Well, i don't use an AR so I don't care if they take them away. I forget the quote or where it was said but it was along the lines of a shotgun hunter saying "When they came for the semi automatic rifles it didn't affect me so i didn't do anything. When They came for handguns i didn't do anything because it didn't affect me, when they came after rifles it didn't affect me, now that they are coming for my shotgun there is nobody to stand up with me"

If we don't stick together and turn a give in because they are going after what you like there won't be anyone to stand together when they come for the guns you enjoy shooting.

WE need to stick together, we can not lose sight of this and we need to fight back when they try and take away ANYMORE or our rights. Its always our side thats expected to give in and understand that its "Common Sense gun laws" but when do we ever regain our lost rights? Why don't we ever get back what we have already given up once proved it didn't work? Once its gone, its gone and there is no getting it back. Please I beg of all gun owners, STICK TOGETHER... without sticking together we are all going to lose.

JOe

 

[KevininPa]

I have a ............

......Saiga. Do I need it for home defense against a burglar? No. Can I use it for hunting here in Pa? No. Am I going to give it up? No. Why? Well for one you never know if a Katrina-type disaster could crop up. The nicest people in the world can become monsters. For another reason, PLAIN OLE' FREAKIN' FUN AND STRESS RELIEF!!!

I never even did the conversion and loaded up on those hi-caps. My only mod was a nice wooden sporter stock. It's just fun to shoot and serves as my camp gun. Feel stressed out? go blast off a couple mags! My wife even has fun with it (even though she hates dealing with all that safety and racking the slide stuff. Revolver girl through and through, God bless her simple heart!), and has a big smile every time she shoots it! You bought them and you are allowed to have them. And have fun with them. People who are ready to concede forget the basic principle of the 2A.

Got more to say, but we have a T-storm moving in fast and hard, really fast and hard! ...so bye-bye!

 

[captain awesome]

Are AR-15's really necessary?

Necessary? What could be more necessary? I think a more appropriate word is inadequate. I wont rest easy till I have an M60 in my bedroom.


but on another note, If everyone else (or even a couple people) in that theater had a carry piece, injuries and deaths would have been minimized if not eliminated. I know thats what we are all thinking, but why aren't the anti's?

 

[berettaprofessor]

I guess what I am saying is that I am preparing to have to concede something to new gun legislation and I would rather it be my AR's than my handguns.

You've missed the entire concept of incremental gun control. First they'll take the evil black rifles and AK47's, then all the wood-furnitured semiautomatic rifles, then the handguns, then your bolt-action 30-06's, and finally the springer's and air guns. It's happened in more than one country and it works for the anti-gun crowd unless you say no to the first step.

 

[kimberkid]

Are AR-15's really necessary?

It is not only necessary, but should be required.

Read the 2nd Ammendment and remember how the United States came to be ... the 2nd is in place so that the citizens can protect themselves from government.

----------------
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
----------------

Having been oppressed by a professional army, the founding fathers of the United States had no use for establishing a professional army of their own. Instead, they decided that an armed citizenry makes the best army of all.

 

[Leanwolf]

DAVE WORKMAN - "And having been insulted in the last moments of an NPR radio program today by the new head of the Brady campaign as being one of the jerks not willing to compromise...well, their idea of compromise is to tell you what they want and if you don't give it up, you're not compromising in good faith.

Their idea...if you compromise today, be ready to compromise some more tomorrow. "

PRECISELY!!!

This is how a neo-lib "progressive gun grabber "compromises."


Anti-gunner - "We intend to ban and confiscate all your firearms ... for the good of the State."

Pro-gunner - "No, you can't do that."

Anti- " You're obstinate and unreasonable, but we'll compromise."

Pro- "How's that?"

Anti- " You must give up some of your evil guns."

Pro - "Some? I thought 'compromise' meant that both parties give up something."

Anti- " That's right."

Pro- "What are you giving up?"

Anti- "We're giving up taking all your guns."

Pro - "Oh, well, okay. I don't want to be unreasonable."

Anti - "Now you're using common sense. We'll take your semi-automatics today. "

Pro - " Well, I don't like it much, but I know I must compromise."

Anti - "That's being a good comrade. Oh, by the way, we'll be back next week for another compromise."

That's the way they work, boys and girls. As the old saying goes, "Life is hard by the yard, but a cinch by the inch."

For the neo-lib "progressives," it's inch by inch by inch by inch by inch... until someday .................

L.W.

 

[XD Fan]

Well said, Leanwolf.